Universities as living laboratories for circular economy: curriculum-integrated agroforestry as environmental management in higher education

Purpose This article aims to examine how curriculum-integrated circular economy (CE) practices can function as an environmental management mechanism within higher education institutions (HEIs). It argues that the academic curriculum, when tightly coupled with operational infrastructure, can serve as a form of institutional “soft governance” that orchestrates circular resource flows across teaching, research and community engagement. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative, single embedded case study methodology is used, conceptualised through a living laboratory (LL) framework. The case is the “Passionfruit Commercialization Project” initiative at an Australian branch campus university in Sarawak, Malaysia. Two embedded units of analysis are examined: (1) a faculty-led agroforestry trial plot functioning as an upstream environmental production system, and (2) a formally integrated final-year Business Consulting Project unit involving 30 undergraduate business students organised into six teams. The complete analytical corpus comprised eight technical and operational records, 24 student assessment artefacts contained within six team portfolios and one consolidated practitioner field-note and reflexive-memo record. Deductive thematic analysis aligned the evidence against three theoretical pillars: environmental management in HEIs, living laboratories and CE principles. Findings Four principal findings emerge. Firstly, the academic curriculum functioned as environmental management infrastructure, with semester deadlines imposing production discipline on the agroforestry system. Secondly, CE principles were operationalised through a dual-layered approach comprising precision agriculture at the upstream level and entrepreneurial waste valorisation at the downstream level. Thirdly, the HEI acted as an environmental orchestrator, bridging internal academic silos and external stakeholder networks. Fourthly, the university extended environmental governance beyond the physical campus by assuming stewardship of a productive rural landscape characterised by biological, agronomic and market uncertainty. Together, these findings illustrate a model of “pedagogical symbiosis” in which the farm needed the students to address its waste and commercialisation challenges, while the students needed the farm’s material resources and operational data to complete authentic assessment tasks. Research limitations/implications The single-site case study in a specific tropical agro-ecological context limits direct generalisability. The study did not formally track the continuation of student-developed products or enterprises after the teaching semester; therefore, enterprise persistence is not claimed as an outcome. Future comparative research across disciplinary contexts and regions is recommended, together with six- and twelve-month follow-up studies examining venture continuation, partnership durability and sustained use of secondary biomass streams. Practical implications The model is low-cost and replicable: it requires land, inter-faculty administrative coordination and an existing curriculum unit, rather than expensive smart infrastructure. University leaders should view operational assets as pedagogical resources. Policymakers in emerging economies should commission HEIs as managers of productive landscapes, expanding green campus metrics to include “community circularity.” Social implications By embedding CE experimentation in curriculum and community partnerships, universities can expand their social role as facilitators of sustainable development and contributors to local innovation ecosystems. The model fosters student agency, sustainability literacy and entrepreneurial capability, while generating socio-economic value for surrounding communities through market testing, value-adding and collaborative production. In emerging economy contexts, such living laboratories can strengthen rural livelihoods, support low-carbon agri-food transitions and widen public participation in environmental problem-solving. The study illustrates how HEIs can act as socially engaged environmental managers rather than purely educational institutions. Originality/value The article makes three original contributions: it reframes curriculum as environmental management infrastructure; it extends the LL concept from urban-technocratic settings to rural agroforestry production; and it demonstrates empirically how CE education and campus environmental management can be integrated through student entrepreneurship in an emerging economy context.